worm: has quality bad

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents creature
Weight: 0.67
, computer virus
Weight: 0.66
, bait
Weight: 0.66
, computer program
Weight: 0.64
Siblings earthworm
Weight: 0.74
, roundworm
Weight: 0.58
, hookworm
Weight: 0.56
, louse
Weight: 0.51
, leech
Weight: 0.51

Related properties

Property Similarity
has quality bad 1.00

Priors about this statement

Cues

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Joint Necessity Sufficiency Implication Entailment Contradiction Entropy

Evidence

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Clauses

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.58
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(computer program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(worm, has quality bad)
0.56
Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.81
Plausible(computer virus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(worm, has quality bad)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(worm, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.81
¬ Plausible(computer virus, has quality bad)
0.07
Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.72
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(worm, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.85
¬ Plausible(computer program, has quality bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.47
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(worm, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(computer program, has quality bad)
0.45
Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(worm, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.57
¬ Remarkable(computer virus, has quality bad)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(worm, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
¬ Remarkable(louse, has quality bad)
0.11
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.83
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(worm, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
¬ Remarkable(roundworm, has quality bad)
0.10
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.77
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(worm, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
¬ Remarkable(leech, has quality bad)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.39
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.94
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.85
Plausible(computer program, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
Remarkable(worm, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(worm, has quality bad)
0.39
Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.81
Plausible(computer virus, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
Remarkable(worm, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.67
¬ Plausible(worm, has quality bad)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.54
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(worm, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.60
Remarkable(leech, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.73
¬ Plausible(leech, has quality bad)
0.54
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(worm, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.43
Remarkable(louse, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.56
¬ Plausible(louse, has quality bad)
0.52
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(worm, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.44
Remarkable(roundworm, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.71
¬ Plausible(roundworm, has quality bad)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(worm, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.61
¬ Salient(worm, has quality bad)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.61
Salient(worm, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(worm, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(worm, has quality bad)

Typical implies Plausible

0.35
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.67
Plausible(worm, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.84
¬ Typical(worm, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.34
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.66
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(worm, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(computer virus, has quality bad)
0.32
Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(worm, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality bad)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.73
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(worm, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.69
¬ Typical(louse, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.69
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(worm, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.80
¬ Typical(leech, has quality bad)
0.09
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.68
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.39
¬ Remarkable(worm, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.83
¬ Typical(roundworm, has quality bad)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.42
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.84
Typical(worm, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.88
¬ Typical(computer virus, has quality bad)
0.41
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.84
Typical(worm, has quality bad) ⋁
Evidence: 0.94
¬ Typical(computer program, has quality bad)